|
Speaking
Out: Debating
Grad Unionization
It
would be entertaining, at the very
least, to hear a debate on the unionization
of graduate students which was between
members of the university community
who are in the top quintile of our
economic spectrum and who feel unionization
is a good and reasonable idea versus
members in the bottom quintile who
feel it is a corruption of the university
and of its principles, if such creatures
were to be found. I have heard this
issue discussed for some time now,
and haven't heard anything very specific
coming from the university in terms
of how exactly a union would negatively
impact the education these students
receive. The expressed fear that if
grad students were to have dental
coverage it would mean that a professor
would have to reorganize his or her
curriculum in such and such a way
does not reflect the kind of critical
thinking skills the university is
proud of fostering. The stereotypical
image of the grad student with the
unraveling sweater and threadbare
jeans need not have bad teeth as well
to complete the cartoon. There seems
to be some vague suggestion that enabling
a grad student to upgrade from Ragu
to a schmancier jar of spaghetti sauce
would somehow impede the rigorous
ingestion of Schopenhauer and Heisenberg.
There
are those who have felt that a university
led by a president who is paid such
a staggering salary might, under certain
circumstances, put the interests of
the bottom line ahead of the interests
of "free inquiry and creativity." I
trust that those people have been
needlessly alarmed, and that this
current panic is similarly unfounded.
It
may well be that since the university
is in the process of scaling down
its medical coverage to its current
employees, grad students will have
a hard time increasing these benefits
substantially. And as Ms. Rodin points
out, pursuing a graduate degree is
different from applying for a job
in the outside world. Shabbier treatment
and longer hours for less pay are
and have been accepted by grad students
for as long as anyone can remember.
And these are likely to continue to
some degree, even with a union.
Bear
in mind that these are people who
have already worked hard and paid
dearly in many cases for their undergraduate
degrees. Their expertise has already
earned them the right and responsibility
of instilling in the undergraduate
population at Penn all the academic
virtues referred to in Ms. Rodin's
letter. But there are limits, and
many people seem to feel those limits
have been reached. And if the very
threat of unionization can cause the
university to revamp its health care
benefits to grad students, how much
more would a union itself insure such
responsiveness?
--
Andy Bresnan
Marking Clerk, Biddle Law Library
Speaking
Out welcomes
reader contributions.
Short, timely
letters on
University
issues will
be accepted
by Thursday
at noon for
the following
Tuesday's
issue, subject
to right-of-reply
guidelines.
Advance notice
of intention
to submit
is appreciated.
--Eds.
|
Almanac, Vol. 49, No. 18, January 21, 2003
|
|